- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2015 05:19:04 -0800
- To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>, RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
My question concerned how LDOM could handle recursive shapes. I see in the
document:
Some other things that SPARQL engines need to implement:
Ability to execute ldom:Functions (recursive SPARQL queries), details to
be written up
Some built-in functions, esp ldom:violatesConstraints, which maps to
checkNodeAgainstConstraint here.
It thus appears that LDOM is not based on SPARQL but is based instead on an
extended SPARQL. The ability to handle recursive SPARQL queries may turn
out to be a significant change to SPARQL engines. Further, there are not
sufficient details here to determine whether the required augmentations to
SPARQL engines can be used to implement recursive shapes.
The document also contains wording indicating that it is not using RDFS
vocabulary in the way that this vocabulary is meant to be used. For
example, subclass determination is not done in the way specified by RDFS.
peter
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJU1L9IAAoJECjN6+QThfjzom0IALTJ2bsF0HU1o7djBx8PQWdn
dQQtmjE3DBB6Fspv7LDRDoeXYDRI76CWd7DxxYUHPbTfzafid4BIKmK0WJDcEBx/
y0ZDEV/o9VerpC9oCqoGX/RGGk827b+NjNbiFVBvaHSjeriH2xqnfz7ex+KjpedK
TYEt9rJaqGLPCEr/P03BHtOura1k4rLvNMxuP1MNJKjssaYWhXFMkKi6wiq+Ck2S
7vtMXhPn1K0vxlb3BBlOl2Wgx5YGCc9jiA48YVwAb6vliw6Hv3cvQbi5sChyvv7t
brQa/upugByLFqPZbS2dBswB5VIBC3tkp5NYE0X8N2N9hntR0eNo6sWBlkVoC8E=
=76ry
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Friday, 6 February 2015 13:19:34 UTC